User:Wiki id2/beforemarch2012

User:Wiki id2/beforemarch2012

 

Welcome, Wiki id2!

I noticed your work on Jenson Button, and thought I'd welcome you to Wikipedia. I'm Ged, and I've been editing here for quite a while. Thank you for your contributions, and I hope you like our encyclopedia project and decide to stay!

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Introduction
• Getting started
• How to edit a page
• Tutorial
• Help pages
• Developing an article
• The Manual of Style

Some other hints and tips:

• I see you have already learned how to customize your userpage; good work!
• When using talk pages, please sign your name at the end of your messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date.
• If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Thanks again for contributing to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! --GedUK  16:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

 

Hello, Wiki id2. You have new messages at Ged UK's talk page.
Message added 18:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GedUK  18:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

 

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Riad Asmat, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Taqi Haider (talk) 07:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not a hoax once Tony Fernades steps down as Lotus F1 head at the beginning of the 2010 season. Riad Asmat will take over. Please type on Google "BBC: Tony Fernades Steps Down". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki id2 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 18 November 2009 (----)

This page is for general discussion of the speedy deletion criteria, not for pleading of individual cases. --Cybercobra (talk) 07:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2, regardless of the website you got this from the image's copyright clearly belongs to McLaren. You must add both a licence and a fair-use rationale (see non-free content) to the image within 7 days or it will be deleted. Please drop me a note if you need assistance with this - Peripitus (Talk) 00:25, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Adam Khan.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 11:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

You've been minnowed for ignoring my request to discuss your intended move of the McLaren article before doing it. The minnow is intended as a friendly reproach - Wikipedia is a community project and it's usually best if we don't just charge off and do what we want if we know that others may have a different view.

I've started a discussion on the move here. Could you explain the logic behind your move there and we can reach a consensus on whether we should keep it or not. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 09:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I note we've also now lost the talk page from the old McLaren page, which should now be at McLaren Racing, and that there's a redlink disambiguation page at the top of McLaren Racing. If you're making these kinds of move in future please make sure you tidy up the loose ends (as well as checking for consensus first). 4u1e (talk) 09:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Starting an edit war over a situation in which you've already a) broken the rules more than once and b) ignored requests to join a discussion, will probably get you blocked. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 16:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries - thanks for commenting. 4u1e (talk) 21:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2, Sorry I took so long to get back to you but life intervened. Images being used for different reasons, and from different sources, have their own way that they need to be treated at Wikipedia.

• Image that you took with your camera (unless it is a photo of a book/cover/artwork) - upload, noting that you created the image and chose on of the free (creative commons etc.) licences. Note that these images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons rather than here so that other projects can use them
• Image taken from a website - unless you are sure of whom created the image these are usually not acceptable as the copyrightholder must be identified
• Image that you have been given permission to upload here. Best to follow the process at Wikipedia:Contact us/Photo submission. Note that the copyright holder must nominate a free licence they are releasing the image under.
• Image that already has a free licence (like some flickr images) - upload noting the source and select the same licence as used on flickr. These should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons
• Any other image.....that is a non-free image (it does not have a creative commons licence) where you know who is the copyright holder.

Read through the 10 points at non-free content criteria and satisfy yourself that it meets them. Images of living people or objects that still exist rarely meet WP:NFCC#1. The image must significantly add to reader's understanding and you must show, in the non-free rationale on the image page how it does this.

Non-free image policy here is difficult to understand and the subject of much debate. Perhaps, if you have an image you want to upload, drop me a line with a link to the image and a link to where you want to put it. I can tell you if (I think) it meets the non-free criteria and walk you through the process. - Peripitus (Talk) 07:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, always format section headings using the equals sign like in this page (and every other page), not using anything else. See Help:Wiki markup#Section headings for a guide. Also please note my previous comment regarding the phrase "2010-present" which does not make any sense. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 13:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Do not keep changing articles to say "2010-present". Maybe English is not your first language but it is patently obvious that the present year is 2010 so this form is nonsensical. Also, I'm going to assume good faith but when you say in the edit summary that the articles for Trulli, Kovalainen and Barrichello also use this, when they clearly don't, this is at best misleading. What are you trying to do, get a warning? Furthermore, di Grassi's article only used this phrase because you put it in there! Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. You may have noticed that I have reverted your swap of Lucas di Grassi and Lucas Di Grassi, not so much because I disagree with the change, but because of the technique you used - what you did was a "cut-and-paste move", which disrupts the article history. Also please note that there is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Lucas Di Grassi about whether the "Di" should be capitalised or not. Please do not change the article name back until there is consensus to do so on the talk page. I will raise the matter at WP:F1, so the issue should be decided one way or the other within a few days. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 21:02, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. The only reason that drivers like Di Grassi, Hulkenberg and Senna have more on their early careers than more established drivers like Alonso and Massa is that their articles have been created during their 'early career', rather than while they are in F1, like Alonso and Massa. There is no reason to make this information 'less important'. It would actually be far more effective to expand the early career sections of the established drivers. Thanks - mspete93 17:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Bretonbanquet is correct - 2010 should be used rather than 2010-present, as it makes more sense. There will be no need to remove information about those drivers' early careers. Removing info is not necessary so long as it is correct and relevant, which it is. - mspete93 17:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. We'll get on just fine but it's important to take good notice of what more experienced editors tell you. They won't always be right, but they usually have good advice. Especially within the F1 Wikiproject, the vast majority of the regular editors are very experienced and they'll usually be right! When someone tells you you've made a mistake, be ready to accept it. If it turns out you were right, then no problem. Good luck if you apply to become an admin - it's difficult and you might not be experienced enough yet, but give it a try :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Wiki id2, I would not apply yet. You should aim for at least 3000 edits first. Don't rush to get that number though... quality is important. Gigs (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

  Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Ram (brand) a different title by copying its content and pasting it into Ram Trucks. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you.

  Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Template:Jeep a different title by copying its content and pasting it into Template:Jeep Car Timeline. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you.

Hi there, if you want to make any page moves on articles that fall within the F1 Wikiproject, please discuss them first as there will always be people who want to have their say. This is particularly the case with subjects that have already been disucussed at great length, such as McLaren => McLaren Racing. The consensus was to keep the article as McLaren, and that goes for all the associated articles and templates. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. Please could you wait until the team's name change is officially confirmed (i.e. at the presentation tomorrow) before creating new pages? Thanks.--Midgrid(talk) 12:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 

A tag has been placed on Taha Hussain requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ~Darth Starbo 16:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 

A tag has been placed on Taha Hussain requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Vipin Hari || talk 19:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I guess the Please do NOT add a "Not held" row for 2009 until after the 2010 race has been run. "Not held" is used to indicate gaps *between* races. doesn't apply to you. -- Falcadore (talk) 21:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is wrong, which is why there is a note asking you not to add it in. Why put the note there at all if it was OK to add it in? --Falcadore (talk) 20:34, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

This topic was discussed at WT:F1 in November 2008 and the consensus was that the top row of the table should contain the last running of the event. DH85868993 (talk) 03:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. Thanks for your recent contributions to Formula One articles. When adding a significant amount of information to an article (e.g. a results table), rather than making multiple small edits in quick succession, can you please prepare the new information in a sandbox page, and then add it to the article all at once? This avoids cluttering the article history with multiple small edits, and lessens the load on the servers. I can help with you with creating a sandbox page if you don't know how to do that. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 21:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

To create a sandbox page, click on this link: User:Wiki id2/sandbox, add some content and press "Save". This will create a page called "User:Wiki id2/sandbox", which you can edit just like a normal page. And yes, I can check your Lotus and Ferrari results tables once you've created them. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. You may have noticed that I reverted your edit where you added the content of Alfa Romeo Grand Prix results into Alfa Romeo in Formula One, because it doesn't make sense to have the same information in two different articles. If you believe the two articles should be merged, feel free to raise the idea at Talk:Alfa Romeo in Formula One. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 11:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. Unfortunately I don't have much experience with creating production car timeslines from scratch - I usually just make minor edits to existing timelines. But from what I can see, you seem to be doing fine by yourself. If you do have trouble, maybe try asking at WikiProject Automobiles. DH85868993 (talk) 22:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for asking the question. Firstly, you guys are edit-warring at Canadian Grand Prix and that's not a good thing. So it's definitely best to leave the article alone or else you might be accused of vandalism or disruption (even if you're right). Secondly, I don't have a strong opinion on this particular matter, but my feeling is that your argument is more logical. But Falcadore and DH85868993 are very experienced and well-regarded editors and if they are telling you something, it's 99.9% likely that it's true, even if it's not very clear at first. So when I looked at the talk page, I saw there has been a discussion about it at Talk:Canadian Grand Prix#2009 Not Held row. It emerged that there was a discussion about it in January at WPF1 here and the consensus is that the not held row is not added until the next race is held. Regardless of what we think, that's the consensus and it's really important that everyone sticks to it. Also, if an admin is called to investigate, he will see that there's a consensus, and anyone operating against it (i.e. you) will be automatically in the wrong. That can lead to trouble. Someone should probably have explained this to you here at your talk page, but anyway. So, I have some sympathy with your argument, but we have to go with the consensus. If you want to change the consensus, it means having another discussion at WPF1, and it's probably too soon for that, since the last one was only in January. I hope this helps you, and please ask if you have any more questions. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:22, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, as I scroll up, I see that this was explained to you yesterday, and the discussion was mentioned here. That should really have been the end of it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It is by no means incorrect information. Under what circumstances is your opinion superior to the consensus of other Wikipedia edittors? Is there a special rule which says, oh but its Wiki id2 making the changes so we have no right to revert. Have some respect for your fellow edittors please. --Falcadore (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure you need to put line breaks in? Don't forget that others will be using different sized screens to yours, so the breaks you're putting in may look rather strange for them. What problem are you trying to fix, anyway? 4u1e (talk) 10:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I made it a couple of years ago now, so I don't remember how I put it together, but here's the code:

-<span style="font-family:Forte">[[User:Midgrid|<span style="color:#FFFF00;background:black">Midgrid</span>]][[User talk:Midgrid|<span style="color:#000000;background:yellow">(talk)</span>]]</span>

The "span style" parts are what gives it its colours.--Midgrid(talk) 20:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Not sure I agree that Team Lotus should apear on the the current team's timeline: the way you've done it, it appears as if it is the same team as the almost completely unrelated Lotus Racing. I've started a discussion here. 4u1e (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I don't understand your logic for this edit comment: "You don't add these classfied finishes unless they finish in the points otherwise the have another million to do. You only do it in point scorers' Eg. Bourdais in Oz 2008." The guy failed to finish the race, yet was classified as a finisher. That requires a footnote, you can't just leave him as appearing to have finished. As for only doing it for points scorers... since when? Find me the discussion about that. If there are other circumstances where drivers have been classified after failing to finish and they don't have a footnote then we can rectify that later. Pyrope 16:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

You want examples where we have footnoted other times when drivers have been classified despite not finishing a race and not scoring points? Ok, well how about.... 2010 Monaco Grand Prix, or 2010 Formula One season, or 2009 Formula One season, or 2008 Formula One season, or 2007 Formula One season, or 2006 Formula One season? Well, there are plenty of season articles, how about some cars: BMW Sauber F1.09, or Force India VJM02, or Williams FW31, or Red Bull RB5, or Toro Rosso STR4, or McLaren MP4-24? You get the point? I suggest that you actually bother to check in future before leaving aggressive and sarcastic comments in edit comments and on other users' talk pages. This may be something that we have introduced in the last couple of seasons, but for you to dogmatically say that "we don't" is both rude and wrong. So there are some older articles where this information is missing. So what? This is exactly the same situation as people including the engine name in the driver career summary articles. Originally we only had the engine manufacturer. Then someone started adding the configuration too. Then more recently people started adding the full engine designation. Things evolve over time. Wikipedia is a mutable resource, we aren't fixed in our approach. Adding information like a non-finishing classified result is easy and quick to do when the race results are fresh and to hand. To go back through the last 60 years of the Championship and update them all would be a lot of work and fairly tedious. Besides, what rankles here is you bald assertion as though you speak for the entire Wikipedia community, when actually we haven't even discussed this as WP:F1. You threw down the gauntlet to me and I have met and matched your challenge. However, when I asked you to show me where this topic had been discussed by the Wiki community you ignored me. So try again. Where was this discussed? Pyrope 17:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Find me three other classified finishes on Wikipedia. Like so. You have 24 hours. If not then I'm correct. There is not a time limit on the truth. Just because you have not heard of an instance occurring, does not make it false. Before dictating to other editors I suggest you become more knowledgeable on the subject you claim expertise. --Falcadore (talk) 16:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I think it's been made pretty clear that the accepted practice is to leave a footnote for drivers who are classified in a race despite not reaching the flag. I strongly urge you to stop removing these notes, as you did at Lotus T127, Hispania F110 and Renault R30, or somebody's going to take further action. Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. FYI, I have proposed 2012 United States Grand Prix, which you created, for deletion, in line with the consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One#2012_United_States_Grand_Prix_article. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, the info you are adding to the Alonso article is unsourced, synthesised argument and original research. The quote is unsourced - it's also wildly inaccurate. You've reinserted it far too many times and you're about ready to break 3RR. I'm taking it off again, and if you want to put it back, there's a discussion about it that's already started. If you just restore it, you'll probably get a warning. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, at the Alonso talk page here. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Wanted to leave you a note that I moved User\Wiki id2\Cars to User:Wiki id2\Cars. The way it was before, it was essentially a new article and not a userpage. However, is there a reason you didn't create it at User:Wiki id2/Cars? Thats the usual page naming convention for subpages. It doesn't really matter too much so I didn't move it to that name myself, but doing that has the advantage that when viewing that page it has a small link in the upper left that links back to your userpage (see User:Syrthiss/Artlist, for example). I also updated the link on your userpage to its current location. If you need help moving it to User:Wiki id2/Cars or deleting the redirect afterwards let me know and I'll be glad to do it. Hope this helps, Syrthiss (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Nope, no problem at all. It was an innocent mistake. :) Syrthiss (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

FYI, moved it again to User:Wiki id2/Cars, to make it a proper subpage--Jac16888^Talk 14:56, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Wiki id2. Unfortunately I'm not actually an administrator, so I can't edit that page. You can find a list of admins here, or leave the request on the article's talk page instead.--Midgrid(talk) 14:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi: Actually, I'm not really a Cricket person. However I might be able to help with getting the Ireland Cricket flag into the template. Although I'm not very good with templates, I might be able to work it in. I'll let you know if I succeed. Cheers, Pigman☿/talk 19:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. According to the Template:Country data Ireland, the reason the flag isn't included in the template is because "... the flag used by Cricket Ireland is non-free". I don't know if that is accurate but unless you can dig up evidence otherwise, I'm not inclined to insert it into the template. Yet it's obvious that we already have a very very low res version on the wiki so I don't know the answer. Sorry I couldn't help you more. Cheers, Pigman☿/talk 19:26, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

 

Hello, Wiki id2. You have new messages at Ged UK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GedUK  11:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Please use Template:Cite web, for inline citations. It helps maintain a consistent style of references in the article. Thank you.-- - M4nag3r(-)rC^[Reply] 12:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Citations means references. I have seen that you just put the link in between the ref tags, which is not the right method. Use the full Template:Cite web to complete references. On the page, Wasim Akram, see your reference style and the other references. Hope you understand! -- - M4nag3r(-)rC^[Reply] 12:51, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

 

The article Natsai Mushangwe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not claims of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Melaen (talk) 02:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

  Hey there Wiki id2, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Wiki id2/Team Lotus. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Likewise, this was obviously not a free image, though the true fault lies with the person who swiped it from the original website. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:05, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I've come to notice that a lot of your referencing is using basic bare links. See here, here and here to rectify this as bare links are discouraged. Cs-wolves(talk) 11:05, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

The standard you're currently using is just as bad as the bare links. Do your refs properly using the links above. Thank you. Cs-wolves(talk) 21:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Cs is right - it's not hard to do. In fact, there are simple tools to make it even easier. See Wikipedia:RefToolbar_2.0, for example. 4u1e (talk) 21:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I can do no better than quoting from the page I linked: 'You can turn on refToolbar by going to the Gadgets tab in your user preferences (click on the link provided) and checking the checkbox next to "refTools" under "Editing gadgets".' You will then find that at the top of your editing window (to the right of the 'help' link) there is a new 'Cite' drop down. If you click on that, you get a list of templates, and if you click on the relevant one of those (web, for example), a new window opens in which you enter the information required. I do recommend reading the guidance Cs provided, as it gives you the necessary background to make use of this tool. 4u1e (talk) 19:16, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Aaqib Javed. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. BTW, is "Wiki id2" your second WP account? If so, is the other account also active? Trafford09 (talk) 12:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I see you like 'Motto of the day'. Very good. Here's a 'Tip of the day' (TOTD):

Tip of the day...   Please summarize your work using the Edit summary box If you make anything other than a minor edit to an article, it helps others if you fill in the edit summary. Edit summaries are visible in the page history, watchlists, and on Recent changes, so they help other users keep track of what is happening to a page. If you use section editing, the summary box is filled in with the section heading by default (in gray text), which you can follow with more detail. You also can put links to articles in the edit summary. Just put double brackets around [[the article title]] like you would normally. The summary is limited to 255 characters, so many people use common abbreviations, such as sp for correcting spelling mistakes, rm for remove, ce for copy-edit, etc. Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip Read more: Edit summary

Trafford09 (talk) 08:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I've undone your edits to the above article as unfortunately they weren't really an improvement and I thought I should explain in more detail than can be managed in a edit summary. Shakib has already played over 100 ODIs, giving that much detail on the New Zealand series – with a match-by-match description of events, including stuff that wasn't even directly related to Shakib's performance – unbalances the article. Either it has to be reduced so it's in proportion, or the same level of detail has to be maintained throughout which will bloat the article beyond a manageable size and what a reader finds interesting. There was also the problem of tone; calling New Zealand's bowling "superb" is an opinion rather. There's nothing wrong with including opinion in an article, but it needs to be made clear whose it is. I understand wanting to make the prose interesting, especially as sports journalism attempts to capture the energy of the game to engage readers, but this is an encyclopedia and we have to stick to verifiable information. Nev1 (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you've understood my point. Including opinion such as an innings was "superb" isn't a problem with grammar, it's a problem with tone. An encyclopedia should have a neutral tone and the clearly expresses an opinion. The level of detail you're including is unsustainable and degrading the quality of the article. Of course events should be weighted by their significance, so a man of the match performance is more noteworthy than a quiet match, but you've gone beyond that and are including information that simply isn't relevant. Let's take the example of the information on the New Zealand series which you rewrote:

Bangladesh participated in a five-match series against New Zealand in October 2010. Bangladesh won the first match courtesy of a four-wicket haul by Shakib. However shortly after the match Mortaza was diagnosed with an injury and Shakib was made temporary captain. The second ODI was washed out due to rain. In the third ODI New Zealand were bowled out for 174 and Shahriar Nafees guided the chase by scoring 73. Shakib scored the winning runs. Bangladesh needed to win the fourth ODI to win the series going into the ODI New Zealand won the toss and chose to bowl. Bangladesh struggled early on with Shariar Nafees and Junaid Siddique falling in quick succession however Shakib came to bat and scored 106 runs before being caught and bowled by New Zealand captain Daniel Vettori. The team managed to score 241. New Zealand chase started horribly with Brendan McCullum and Ross Taylor falling early. However Kane Williamson continued to resist and managed to score 108 he found little support with the remainder of the lower order. New Zealand were 232 all out and Bangladesh won by nine runs. This was the first time in cricket history in Bangladesh that the team beat a full-strength test-playing nation in an ODI series. As the previous wins against Zimbabwe and West Indies were against weakened teams. When the fourth ODI was played Bangladesh collapsed to 174 all out courtesy of a superb New Zealand bowling performance, when New Zealand batted they lost two early wickets in Brendan McCullum and Jesse Ryder. New Zealand slipped to 20-5. New Zealand captain Daniel Vettori and Grant Elliott led a resurgence, but, the New Zealand brittle batting order couldn't bear the pressure and the match came down to the wire with Kyle Mills continuing to resist Bangladesh, in the final over being bowled by Rubel Hossain he fired a full toss which went for four, the next ball was a yorker and a dot ball. And the following ball was a yorker which wiped out the leg stump. This became the lowest score Bangladesh had ever defended, New Zealand collapsed to 171 all out. Bangladesh won the five-match series 4-0 winning the first an third match comfortably and fighting hard to win the fourth and fifth match.(the second ODI was washed out due to rain) ^[1] This became arguably Bangladesh's finest hour in international cricket.^[2]

In the above there are multiple problems with the level of detail and tone.

1. "Bangladesh won the first match courtesy of a four-wicket haul by Shakib": this implies it was the only performance of significance. The four-wicket haul may have been important, but who says? Teams have lost ODIs even when people have scored centuries or taken five wicket hauls for them.
2. "In the third ODI New Zealand were bowled out for 174 and Shahriar Nafees guided the chase by scoring 73": in what way is Shahriar Nafees' performance relevant to an article on Shakib Al Hasan?
3. "Shakib scored the winning runs": Shakib's a middle order batsmen and has been at the crease on more than one occasion when Bangladesh have won. Are we to include every time he scored the winning runs? Scoring the winning runs isn't necessarily significant. He could have just walked the the crease with a single to get from nine overs and edged it through the slips.
4. "New Zealand won the toss and chose to bowl": again this just isn't important; every match has a toss, why both mentioning this one?
5. "New Zealand chase started horribly": editorialising again and not taking a neutral stance, from Bangladesh's view it might have started ideally.
6. "However Kane Williamson continued to resist and managed to score 108 he found little support with the remainder of the lower order": in an article about Shakib Al Hasan, I'm bewildered why there's so much information on the performances of others; no link is made between Williamson's century and what Shakib did. It does not provide context, it merely distracts when done like this.
7. "174 all out courtesy of a superb New Zealand bowling performance": it's interesting that even though you said you recognised some of the tone was poor (well, you misunderstood my point about tone to mean grammar) you failed to change this example I picked out.
8. "when New Zealand batted they lost two early wickets in Brendan McCullum and Jesse Ryder": again there's the problem of how does this related to Shakib. This level of information belongs in an article about the series, not one player. If you could clean up the tone of the prose, I'd seriously recommend you put this kind of stuff in New Zealand cricket team in Bangladesh in 2010–11 rather than here.
9. "New Zealand brittle batting order couldn't bear the pressure and the match came down to the wire with Kyle Mills continuing to resist Bangladesh, in the final over being bowled by Rubel Hossain he fired a full toss which went for four, the next ball was a yorker and a dot ball": no mention of Shakib, and describing New Zealand's batting as brittle is a judgement call Wikipedia editors should not be making. Who described them as brittle? A pundit or former cricketer commenting on the state of New Zealand's batting in the series would be the kind of detail that does improve the article if it could be found.
10. "winning the first an third match comfortably and fighting hard to win the fourth and fifth match": why repeat what's already been said in the rest of the article? (Never mind the problem with who said whether the wins were comfortable or difficult.)
11. "This became arguably Bangladesh's finest hour in international cricket": who argued this? Unless that opinion is attributed to someone, it does not belong in an encyclopedia article.

What you replaced (shown below) was an effort to keep out the unimportant detail that bloated the article after your edit. It mentions Shakib's significant performances, the century and the four wicket haul for example, while providing context that it was the team's first win against a full strength ICC Full Member nation and that Shakib finished with most runs and wickets for either side.

In October 2010, New Zealand went to Bangladesh for five ODIs. In the first match of the series Mortaza injured his ankle and was forced to leave the field; Shakib took over, and under his leadership Bangladesh secured a nine-run victory, with Shakib himself taking four wickets and scoring 58. Once it emerged that Mortaza would be unable to play in the rest of the series he was made captain for the remaining matches.[89] In the fourth match Shakib scored a century and took three wickets to help his team win nine runs.[90] Bangladesh went on to win the series 4–0,[91] their first series victory against a full strength ICC Full Member nation.[90] Shakib finished the series as the player with most runs and wickets on either side: 213 runs[92] and 11 wickets.[93]

You also need to work on your referencing. In the above example you ditched several inline citations and referenced all your new material to two pages which simply didn't cover everything. In this edit you include only one reference; that's not a problem as long as all the information provided is in the link but that's not the case. Where in that article does it say the fourth ODI was rained off? In this edit the end of the paragraph under the section you renamed series against Zimbabwe (2010) is unreferenced. Per WP:V that information can be removed if challenged. It's standard practise on Wikipedia to provide references every time you add material to an article. As you've managed to use them elsewhere you are clearly aware of this, so it's really not acceptable to be sloppy in this way. With this poor referencing, editorialising seems to have crept in. You added "He criticsed the fact that he had been given a side that he didn't want and that he wasn't happy with some of the top order that was selected for the series referring to the selection of Mohammad Ashraful" which is completely unsubstantiated. Where exactly does Shakib refer to the selection of Ashraful? Finally, when you add referenced information to an article, could you please ensure it's formatted in the same manner as the rest of the article. Having references with different formats is untidy and goes against the manual of style. I'll post a copy of this onto the talk page to demonstrate that I've made an effort to solve this problem. Given the problems listed above, I have reverted your edits and ask you to please not reinstate them. Nev1 (talk) 13:44, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

If the authors of the references had made a link between Shakib's leadership and the performance of Williamson for example it might be worth including that kind of information, however without that explicit link you're adding speculation that bloats the article. Beyond the implication that as he's captain Shakib is suddenly responsible for every on-field event there was nothing in the article to show why that information was relevant. It still doesn't seem appropriate to me, but if you feel very strongly that it is I recommend asking WT:CRIC for wider input. Nev1 (talk) 14:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

That the series win is "arguably Bangladesh's finest hour in international cricket" is obviously an opinion because you wrote "arguably". It is not empirically their finest hour, and is certainly debatable. Nev1 (talk) 14:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add your own opinions to articles as you did here. Verifiability is a policy and not optional. Moreover, that kind of material was in the wrong place; that section was meant to be a list of winners without commentary on who won and why. Nev1 (talk) 18:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 

Thank you for uploading File:Taha Hussain.PNG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I noticed you've been editing cricket articles. Would you like to join the Cricket "WikiProject"? We'd welcome you. --Dweller (talk) 09:34, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Great. I found the following template, which will help get you started. --Dweller (talk) 09:38, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello Wiki id2! I noticed that you contribute to cricket related articles. We are a "WikiProject" aiming to expand, improve and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. We would like to invite you to join us. If you would like to help but don't know what to do, please see our project page or inquire on our talk page. You may sign up for the project on our members list. Happy editing!

Hello.

The templates for Cricket international tournaments show the players surnames only. Can you please not edit them to include forenames too.

Thanks.

RE: Who has decided? The templates of all sports for squads have just the surname. You're first user I have seen to use both names. The templates are then too long. If you have a problem with it then open a discussion in the Cricket project Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket. Dont just decide that what you say goes and start editing templates. Nowoco 12:11, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Template:Pakistan Squad 2011 Cricket World Cup. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Nev1 (talk) 18:43, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Please explain you changes on the article's talk page. Nev1 (talk) 19:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with W:BRD; so far you are failing to discuss your edits. There's already a thread on the article's talk age. If you are not willing to discuss your edits I will have to ask an uninvolved admin to step in. Nev1 (talk) 18:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

In the time it took you to ask me to leave the article in its shoddy state, you could have come up with a vaguely coherent reason to do so. This has been an issue for days and you've still had time to revert repeatedly so I don't find your pleas convincing. But at least you're using the talk page now, that's definitely a step in the right direction. Nev1 (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with WP:V; if you do not include sources with your edits they will be reverted. Nev1 (talk) 17:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lahore-Lions.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 19:04, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

  Please do not remove file deletion tags from file description pages on Wikipedia, as you did to File:Lahore-Lions.jpg, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 20:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 

Thank you for uploading File:Saqlain Mushtaq.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Rawalpindi rams.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:FP t20 logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 21:47, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Multan Tigers.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Islamabad Leopards.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Abbotabad Rhinos.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Hyderabad Hawks.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Lhr-lions.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:33, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Rawalpindi rams.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Lahore Eagles.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Quetta bears.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Thanks for uploading File:Karachi Zebras.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Salman Butt.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bencherlite^Talk 14:49, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

 

A tag has been placed on File:Saqlain Mushtaq.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bencherlite^Talk 14:58, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

 

The article Taha Hussain has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTNEWS, unfortunately just another murder victim, nothing comes up on Google News (and the first ref is dead) and there's nothing to show that this incident has any notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bencherlite^Talk 15:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Taha Hussain.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bencherlite^Talk 08:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

 

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for renewed copyright violations, including an attempt at using your Flickr account [1] for "license washing" of File:PAC-ebook 1.png. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

You are using this template in the wrong namespace. Use this template on your talk page instead.

You are using this template in the wrong namespace. Use this template on your talk page instead.

In your first unblock request you said "I have learnt now and express a full apology for my mistake, also I can assure you that I didn't intend for a copyright violation". But as you admit you lied on Flickr, you clearly knew what you were doing and you *did* intend a copyright violation. And this comes after a period of more than two years of copyright violations. Copyright violation is serious, and though accidental copyright violation will happen and will be dealt with, it is very important for Wikipedia to not allow access to deliberate copyright violators. And it does seem suspicious that you have suddenly decided to stop your deliberate copyright violation now, only after you were blocked. I can't review this latest request, as I have already reviewed one, and I'm not sure what it would take for someone else to unblock you. But I suggest a voluntary ban on uploading *any* images to Wikipedia would help - would you agree to that? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes I agree with a voluntary ban on uploading *any* images, can we keep it for a specific time period say 6 months - 1 year? (Wiki id2(talk) 10:26, 28 February 2012 (UTC))

Before I make any specific suggestion, I'd like to ask a question - after the expiry of such a ban, what kind of images would you wish to upload and where would you get them from? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

How about the topic ban on image uploads remains in force on an indefinite basis. After six months, we can consider it provided you demonstrate proper image handling by making five successful upload requests at Wikipedia:Files for upload? Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

And how about deleting all those copyvio files from your Flickr account too, whilst we're at it, before anyone unblocks you? Leaving those files there as apparently free for reuse and uploading on Wikipedia / Commons increases the chances that someone will upload them in ignorance of the true position. Bencherlite^Talk 12:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Both those suggestions sound great to me - I do think all photos hosted on any other sites with false claims about being free to upload to Wikipedia should be removed before unblock. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

As requested I have deleted all of the pictures from my flickr photostream, furthermore an indefinite ban and then five correctly uploaded images sounds good to me. (Wiki id2(talk) 14:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC))

Unblocked according to agreed conditions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited PAC-nBook 1, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages PAC and Android (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)